— Comrade Okuyan, does Turkey, the Balkans, Central Asia - the Turkic world, which is inextricably linked to the world of Slavic peoples, currently have the opportunity to break out of the established paradigm of subordination to the United States and submission to comprador elites?
This does not necessarily mean that Turkey has merely been a puppet of the United States in the past. Dependency relations are always complex and not at all unambiguous. However, the United States, as a much stronger capitalist power, was undoubtedly the dominant party – as it is today. But let us be clear: just as in the United States or other imperialist countries in Europe, where large monopolies dictate the foreign agenda, the same applies to Turkey. I would not say that politics has no influence, but if Turkey were to loosen its ties with the United States or develop closer relations with other countries, this would reflect the demands of the Turkish upper class. Unfortunately, the working class still has little say in Turkish foreign policy. There is also a historical reality: there were bloody wars between the Russian and Ottoman Empires. In addition, the nationalist movements that emerged in the Balkans, some of them supported by Russia, contributed to the downsizing of the Ottoman Empire. Despite the transitory but historically significant Bolshevik-Kemalist alliance formed after the Great October Revolution of 1917, there has always been a creeping anti-Russian sentiment in the structure of Turkish society.
I say all this for the following reason: the current Turkish political order uses Russia as a bargaining chip in the context of the competition and contradictions of the global system. Turkey occasionally takes bold steps to expand its room for maneuver, but it will not separate from the US-led alliance system unless there is a major shift in the global balance of power. And this is exactly what is happening today. Ankara has used its rapprochement with Russia to increase its bargaining power with the US and has rapidly strengthened its Atlanticist initiatives in the economic, military and political fields over the past year and a half. As I said, this is the choice of the Turkish bourgeoisie. And it is of course the choice of the AKP, the governing party of Turkey, whose leadership is almost entirely made up of “businessmen”.
— Is it necessary and possible to accept the peace initiatives put forward by Russia, to cooperate with various political and social forces, to take part in events, to activate an interaction with the different social classes and their representatives?
— Lasting peace is impossible without the affirmation of the struggle of the peoples, without questioning - and ultimately suppressing - the social system that generates war. At a certain point, discussing whether the position of a state is more moral or which side is more justifiable becomes useless. We cannot consider foreign policy separately from domestic policy. Of course, there are cases in which action does not take into account the agreements and international norms in force at all, and there it becomes relatively easy to take a clear position. However, as soon as we start to evaluate a social system or the government of a country only on the basis of the position (whether true or false, temporary or permanent) of that government towards, for example, the United States, we are in trouble. In that case, we could have spent a third of the last 20 years supporting Erdogan. Fortunately, we have principles that protect us from these mistakes. On the other hand, at least for us, fighting NATO and the United States on the international stage remains the top priority today. We are not engaged in any mission that could overshadow this goal and shape our rhetoric accordingly. At the same time, however, we do not consider ourselves allies of the current Russian state. Our position on issues of war and peace - and even on NATO - is fundamentally different from that of the authorities in power in Moscow. From the very beginning, we have made clear and decisive assessments of the causes of the war in Ukraine. NATO is not solely responsible for the war that took the lives of the children of two closely related peoples who once built brotherhood and equality together in the Soviet Union. The roots of today's Nazi regime in Ukraine can be found in the counter-revolution of 1991. This counter-revolution was a class event - the triumph of the bourgeoisie in Russia, Ukraine, the Baltics, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The true origin of wars lies in this class rule - in the competitive, contradictory and crisis-prone nature of capitalism. Without a questioning of this socio-economic system, there can be no real struggle for peace.
— What is more useful for the Turkish people: to follow the instructions of US sanctions? Or to develop the economy in violation of US instructions?
The AKP leadership’s reluctance to impose sanctions on Russia (although driven by its own agenda) was, in fact, the right course of action. This position deserves recognition, especially when compared to the demands of the social democratic opposition that Turkey should not only participate in the sanctions, but also go beyond them. It is beneficial for Turkey to develop relations with all neighboring countries. Of course, this should not be done in an expansionist perspective. Unfortunately, capitalism inherently involves competition and wars. However, we should foster a form of interaction that emphasizes non-interference in internal affairs and respect for agreements and borders. In this context, we seek to create an environment conducive to a socialist Turkey. This requires establishing good relations with all countries in the region, especially Russia. In particular, we support the development of Turkey’s economic ties with Russia. Joining the sanctions not only brings Turkey closer to the military plans of NATO and the United States, but also harms our people. On the other hand, it is crucial that Turkey avoids creating new dependencies, for example in the energy sector, and refrains from unilateral dependence on any country in vital sectors.
— De-dollarization processes are taking place everywhere. What position, taking into account the interests of workers, is it desirable for countries to take in foreign trade: adopt the dollar? Carry out transactions in national currencies? Try to create a new currency?
We certainly do not shed tears for the weakening of the dollar's dominance in the international system! We have been carrying on the slogan "Down with US imperialism" all our lives and we do not budge from our positions. However, this change should bring about other events. Is the working class becoming a new force just because the dominance of the dollar is decreasing? De-dollarization is a product of the dynamics and competition within the imperialist system. The decline of the dollar cannot contain the ruthless exploitation by multinational corporations around the world. Carrying on world trade in local currencies contradicts the logic of the system. Capitalism is built on inequality. New strong benchmark currencies or digital alternatives can and are emerging, but an egalitarian international order that replaces the current system dominated by powerful imperialist countries is only possible in the form of socialism. In a world dominated by huge monopolies and oligarchs, it would be naive to expect trade and all capital movements to adhere to the principle of “fairness.”
— Returning to cooperation with Russian parties, public associations, politicians, businesses and starting from the interests of the national working class, how should international cooperation be structured?
I could answer this question by giving some of our initiatives in Turkey as an example. The Communist Party of Turkey (TKP) calls on the republican segments of the country, inviting them to break with the capitalist class and all its political extensions. We can discuss everything: this is a fundamental issue. There is no “good” capitalism or a preferential form of capital. Even a temporary compromise with capital would mean an act of suicide for workers. Capital has no progressive or reactionary, just or unjust form. The TKP has therefore declared that it will not submit to the capitalist class in its own country, will not obey its apparatus of domination, its policies or its foreign policy. This is our promise to our people and the country we love. These are the demands of working-class revolutionism and patriotism. We expect the same position from revolutionaries in other countries. Cooperation must be built on this basis. The fact that we do not consider any capitalist or bourgeois political group in the world as a friend is not a consequence of sectarianism. The reality of life is harsh and we do not want to waste time looking for allies within the barbarian class.
